Jump to content
News Ticker
karira

Rajasthan High Court misinterpreting the RTI Act ?

Recommended Posts

karira

Rajasthan High Court misinterpreting the RTI Act ?

 

Came across this #StrangeDecision of the Rajasthan HC (Jodhpur bench) wherein the Hon'ble court has applied the provisions of Sec 19(6) of the RTI Act, even to second appeal.

 

Is it a misinterpretation or am I "missing" something ?

 

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

None Present For The vs By Way Of This Writ Petition on 26 February, 2015

1

 

Suraj Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

(S. B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.335/15)

 

Date of Order : 26.2.15

 

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA

 

 

None present for the petitioner.

 

 

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking

 

directions to the respondent-State Public Information

 

Commission to decide the second appeal preferred by him.

 

The petitioner made an application seeking

 

information to the Public Information Officer. The request

 

for certain information was refused by the Public

 

Information Officer and therefore, the petitioner preferred

 

an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate

 

Authority failed to decide the appeal within the stipulated

 

period. In these circumstances, the petitioner preferred

 

second appeal before the State Information Commission on

 

16.1.14, which has not been decided till this date. Hence,

 

this petition.

 

It is to be noticed that as per mandate of provision of

 

sub-section (6) of Section 19, of the Right to Information

 

Act, appeal is required to be disposed of by the appellate

 

authority within 30 days of receipt of the appeal or within

 

such extended period not exceeding a total of forty five

 

days from the date of filing thereof.

2

 

In this view of the matter, the petition is disposed of

 

with the direction to the respondent no.4-State Public

 

Information Commission to decide the second appeal, if

 

any, preferred by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably

 

within a period of one month from the date of receipt of

 

certified copy of this order.

 

 

(SANGEET LODHA), J.

vij

 

#StrangeDecision

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
harinder dhingra

Learned Justice Sangeet Lodha has messed up everything while interpreting section 19(3) of RTI Act 2005. The Learned Judge has quoted Section 19(6) of RTI Act 2005 and then added period as stipulated under Section 19 (1) (first appeal) of RTI Act 2005.

 

Total mix up. Wish if the learned Justice had read the order before signing it.

 

Kya kare agar HC aise order pass karegee?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Total mix up. Wish if the learned Justice had read the order before signing it.

Kya kare agar HC aise order pass karegee?

 

 

What is the real issue ?

 

Is it that the people working in HC are not diligent or just that they do not have the qualifications/capability/capacity to do their job ?

 

I am asking this because this is the 4th such order (with errors on the face of it) I have read today ....and all are from different High Courts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
harinder dhingra

I think the real issues are many.

 

First and foremost, we are not getting the best talent to the Benches because of selection process and best brains are preferring money over service to society by opting to do practice in the courts.

 

Second is that RTI is considered to be not very "important" matter as far as the Judges of Hon'ble HC & SC. To tell you a recent kissa where a SC judge asked me what you are doing? I replied that I am working on RTI Act implementation. He asked me again who toh theek hain magar aap karte kya hain? This has happened to me so I know how RTI is being treated in HC & SC.

 

Third is the work load also, some of the judges especially PH HC has around 80-100 cases everyday and due to advocates seeking "pass over" in the morning, most of these cases are heard at 3 PM onwards and often lasting till 5.30-6 PM and then the orders are typed and by the time it finishes it is 9 PM and then you know what happens. This is practical situation, I am not justifying anything.

 

Fourth, is that talent available is fit enough to cope up to the pressure of the workload.

 

The above observation are my personal and do not intent to cause any aspersion on anyone.

 

harinder dhingra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jps50

There could be typographical error. We may bear with human infirmities too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chittorian

Judges of HC/SC are products of Judicial Families where merit is not required for appointment only birth is sufficient.

Because of this Bench Hunting, Advocate Grooming, Uncle Judge Syndrome etc is affecting our Judiciary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
G.R.Vidyaranya

I would have appreciated the HC if they had committed the case back to FAA with a warning or strictures against PA so that 1st Appeal process is not bypassed due to time lapse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aditya_
Came across this #StrangeDecision of the Rajasthan HC (Jodhpur bench) wherein the Hon'ble court has applied the provisions of Sec 19(6) of the RTI Act, even to second appeal.

............

It is to be noticed that as per mandate of provision of sub-section (6) of Section 19, of the Right to Information Act, appeal is required to be disposed of by the appellate authority within 30 days of receipt of the appeal or within such extended period not exceeding a total of forty five days from the date of filing thereof.

............

 

I think that "appellate authority" (in the paragraph which is quoted above) refers to "The Appellate Authority" in the previous paragraph, where it is clearly used for the first appellate authority.

 

I don't find anything in the decision which might lead to the interpretation that the court is applying 19(6) to second appeal also.

 

Are you saying so due to the court directing the SIC to dispose the appeal expeditiously? (in the last paragraph)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

With due respect, i do not agree with post No. 6. We should not use such words for Hon'ble justice of HC and SC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira
I think that "appellate authority" (in the paragraph which is quoted above) refers to "The Appellate Authority" in the previous paragraph, where it is clearly used for the first appellate authority.

 

I don't find anything in the decision which might lead to the interpretation that the court is applying 19(6) to second appeal also.

 

Are you saying so due to the court directing the SIC to dispose the appeal expeditiously? (in the last paragraph)

 

The court has implied that Sec 19(6) is for second appeal and therefore issued directions to the SIC.

As you say, it is only for first appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

R/aditya_, i would like to salute for your knowledge! (?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • shrivar1212
      By shrivar1212
      Hello,
      I require help on co-operative issue. I had filed the RTI with the PIO, Dy registrar of co-op societies seeking information on affairs of society.
      The PIO has replied stating that the information I am seeking is available with co-operative society. My query is:
      1] Can PIO direct an applicant to private body for information?
      2] The society in question comes under the jurisdiction of the PIO, since PIO is public authority and co-operative society a private body, is it not duty of PIO to seek information from society and give it to me? How can PIO direct me back to society? This is RTI application, either I have to appeal or I have to forego. I cannot complaint against reply. So I want to approach FAA, under what grounds can I?
      3] What kind of violation PIO has committed by directing me back to private society? 
      4] Does co-operative society come under the purview of RTI ACt?
      Your views are appreciated. I am fighting lone battle with corrupt system. 
       
    • Shree Vathsan
      By Shree Vathsan
      Can the General Diary of the police station where particulars of "All the details in r/o criminals arrested and entry of arrival/departure of all enrolled police officers on duty with nature of their duties, duty performed and places visited etc."   are maintained be inspected and photo copies sought from a particular police station under RTI?
      Is there any particular clause/section that needs to be quoted for inspection under RTI? Any format available for inspection under RTI?

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy